DURAN the GREAT..31 years ago TODAY

Oh right well duran had to fight his fight for hearns to beat him. Had he fought more like barkley he'd have iced hearns with ease.

 

9000 is not very outrageous.

 

I said Leonard would beat Duran 9 out of 10 times had they fought. Hearns would beat Duran 10 our ot 10 at this time. Benitez would beat Duran 9 out of 10!!! That is what I mean by outclassing. Those guys had elite speed and knew how to fight in versatile ways which Duran could not adjust to.
The 10 out of 10 times when I mention Hearns beating Duran. That is how dominant Tommy was against Duran. His speed was too much and his sharp punching with speed and power is something Duran never saw in his 81 fights up to that point.

Duran tried to get inside and be aggressive a few times and he was countered with the left either as a jab, or at the beginning of round 2 as a pawing side jab. The first time Duran leaned in Tommy countered him with left hand which hurt Duran first. Duran tried to lean in to work the body,and then when Duran backed up Tommy started throwing the right and it was just a matter of time before Duran was knocked out. Tommy even lifted Duran off the ground with a left to the body at the end of round one. Once Tommy started to land the left clean, he used it to distract Duran and get Duran to not think about the right.

Round 2 more of the same. Duran actually came out spunky at the beginning of round 2 and Tommy did some quick left hand counters to keep him off and put the momentum back in his corner. Duran was trying to get momentum, but it lasted a very short time. Duran landed his best punch when Hearns had Duran against the ropes in round 2 as Duran tried to bate Hearns into making a mistake. He landed a nice counter, but still nothing which was going to stop Hearns aggression. Again once Tommy regrouped and his speed was all offense. When Tommy started to land he had it all his way and Duran couldn't do anything but take the punches.

There is no way Duran would ever beat Hearns at that time. There were windows of opportunity for Duran to beat Hearns. 1988 around the time Hearns fought Kinchen Duran might have maybe made it interesting, but Tommy would always find his range with his jab and right hand, and if Duran didn't get under those punches which he didn't seem capable of doing, Hearns would stop him always.

One thing of note about Duran/Hearns since you mentioned it. Tommy's last punch was set up by what Hearns called a fadeaway right hand. He was putting his jab to Duran's chest and making him think about that punch so he could land the right. It obviously worked against Duran who did not get under any of Tommy's punches. Tommy in 1989 tried that punch against Leonard. Jabbing to his body in round 3 after hurting Ray the same round, and Ray ducked and was hit in the back of the head which sort of pulled down Ray as he was stunned. It was scored a knockdown, but in reality it was a push down as Ray was hurt. But that round 3 showed how Ray did not fall for the same punch Duran did when Duran was knocked out. It was just something which made clear that Ray was faster than Duran and could avoid punches by Hearns which Duran could not. The speed difference was too much. Duran would never be used to fight a guy who was offensive and fast like Hearns.

They interviewed Hearns before the Duran fight and Hearns predicted a round 2 knockout. The announcer said Ray could not stop Duran how can you? Tommy laughed and said " I punch much harder than Ray Leonard. I don't think Duran can take my punches if I land them with speed and power."

 

Beating Barkley for Duran was predictable. I knew he would beat him when I heard the fight was signed. Barkley was as slow as Duran and actually Duran in my mind was faster or at least was faster to land his punches on the inside with better punch technique. Duran was almost fighting inside Barkley's arms which made him closer to Barkley then Barkley was to hitting Duran. That is a great style for Duran. A one dimensional guy who is slow.
Against Hearns, Barkley could take Tommy's punch and he was a big strong guy who was fighting Hearns when Tommy saw him as his first defense of his WBC title. Tommy lost that fight as much as Barkley won it. The fact that Tommy was stopped by Barkley, just hides the fact that Tommy was on his way to a 4th round TKO win over Barkley either via body punches or the cuts over Barkley's eye. I actually wanted Barkley to fight Virgil Hill after Virgil beat Tate to win the title for the second time, since it would have been an easy fight for Virgil and shown how styles make fights. Virgil was strong and had a fast counter left, which Barkley would have walked into. He might not have been stopped in the first like Kinchen was, but he would have been stopped. The Kinchen fight shows how styles make fights. Kinchen gave Tommy hell in his fight and gave him a harder fight than Virgil did and almost stopped him, and Virgil outclassed Kinchen and then Tommy beats Virgil easily enough.

 

If barkley is so predictable why could hearns never defeat him?

How do you think hearns matches up against roy jones at lightheavyweight? I think he gets outclassed 9 out of ten.

How you think he does against james toney at lightheavyweight? I think he gets outclassed 9 out of ten.

It isn't just that he loses to these guys, he'd get outclassed that's why he isn't as great as you make out.

 

Saying Tommy would get outclassed is speculation which isn't proven by any facts at all. As a matter of fact, the only fab 4 to win a lightheavyweight title from a legit lightheavyweight of the 1990s was Hearns, and he practically outclassed Virgil. You think Jones and Toney outclass Hearns yet I know Duran was outclassed by Hearns,Leonard and Benitez. Duran actually being outclassed by Hearns and Benitez and Ray is strong evidence compared to speculation. That is fact.

 

yeah mate. that's the whole point.

 

I think the guys Hearns beat (just for his title) are exceptional and not really rivaled. Cuevas 11 title defenses and Hearns stops him in 2 at welt. Benitez- another legend. Hearns outboxes the boxer in 15 at 154. Tommy stops Duran in 2 in a what should have been unification of a title. Then Hill -10 title defenses and an undefeated fighter at 175. 4 times Hearns beats HOF fighters for titles. Well when in history has a man won titles against 4 guys like that. Overrated? Well like I always said, Tommy's record speaks for itself. Hard to argue with those kinds of wins.

Roy Jones and James Toney (especially James Toney) do not have the aura of Benitez, and Hearns and Leonard. Jones was a great fighter, but his approach to boxing was not to fight the best. You are just bringing up names which are completely outside the era of Hearns, which still Tommy could compete with.
Benitez and Duran and Hearns had many common opponents As for Jones, back in 1996 around the time Roy fought Eric Lucas, Thomas Hearns was asking for the Jones fight. Jones ignored him saying he didn't want to be blamed for beating a legend. I thought he could beat him and Emanual Steward who was very honest about said he thought so also, and even Mike McCallum after fighting Jones said Hearns was a guy who could beat Jones. Toney? Tough fight for Hearns. Good friend of Hearns also. So I doubt they would fight, but if they did I don't think James necessarily beats Tommy. Again when did James fight a guy like Hearns? Prince Charles? Tiberi? Hembrick? Most of those guys from the 1990's never fought a guy with a jab like Hearns. The jab was the key for Hearns if he fought Toney and Jones.
Barkley was predictable and not a great fighter. Benn stopped him in one round and Nunn and Kalambay beat him by decision. All he has is that he beat Hearns. He was strong and he could take Tommy's punch long enough for to land on Tommy when Tommy got careless. What more can you say. Some guy Cassius said I am a broken record, but you guys do not seem to listen to what people say so I have to repeat things. Hearns was headed to a 4th round TKO win over Barkley.

 

I am bringing up facts. Hearns was absolutely in the era of Duran and Benitez and Leonard. Duran moved up into the prime era of Hearns at welterweight. Duran is the one who moved up to fight Ray and said after he beats Ray, Hearns is next. And Duran was 28 years old when he said this. The fact Hearns and Duran did not meet at welt was because Ray beat Duran at 147 and Duran's career was delayed a little. Duran came back in Jan. of 1982 and lost easily to Benitez. Again Duran lost. Had he won, Hearns would have probably fought Duran for his title like he fought Benitez. Duran wins a title in 1983 against Moore and a year later after fighting Hagler he fights Hearns. They were destined to fight and they did which is good. But Hearns beat him easily as he always would have. Hearns was too quick. Everything Duran did Hearns had an answer for. Duran came in aggressive Hearns would use his jab and then land his right hand and easily stop Duran's momentum. Duran sat back, Hearns would jab to the body and land the right even easier. The speed and working off the left hand meant Duran would never beat Hearns. I am surprised that guy said if Duran fought like Barkley. He was probably joking, because he couldn't be serious.

 

MAG is a high calibre poster with vast knowledge of 80's boxing

 

duran fighting hearns at 154 and hagler at 160 in the eighties = hearns fighting toney at 168 and jones at 175 in the nineties. that was the point.

 

Guys from a completely different era yes they were fighting at their prime in a different decade to hearns prime.

During the 70's duran had over 70 fights against the best lightweights in the world, beating them all. That's his era. What were the other 3 doing that decade?

Yeah hearns was destined to knockout bark which is why he did so in the rematch, oh wait...

You speculate duran loses 9 out of 10 against ben, sugar, marv and hearns well I speculate that if they fought him between 135 and 147 they lose 9 of 10.

You're so blinkered it's unreal. This man was a thirty year old blown up lightweight. Any success above welterweight was entirely unprecedented.

 

mag lives on esb and is a broken record and then there is teeto with his dildo looking avatar of he manilow!

 

Duran moving up to 147 in 1980 at 28 years old is an old fighter? That guy says I am a broken record yet I have to repeat things. Duran fought at 154 as early as 1978 when he was 27 years old. Trying to make Duran this old washed up guy, and then giving him credit for beating Ray in 1980 is wanting it both ways. Duran is included in the fab 4 fame and he should be. He was as much a part of it as anyone, and you guys saying he was old and washed up is diminishing him more than complimenting him. Duran never said he was washed up, especially since he fought until 2001, 20 years after you guys say he was old and washed up. Duran used excuses he didn't train.

 

he was 32 when he fought hagler and hearns. he'd been a fighter for fifteen years. hagler is one of the greatest middleweights of all time. hearns is maybe the greatest ever at 154. why would duran beat them?